M.STATECHARTEREDCREDITUNIONSUNDER501(c)(14)(A)
Introduction
State charteredcreditunions without capital stock, organized and operated
for mutual purposes and without profit are exempt from Federal income tax under
IRC 501(c)(14)(A). Federal creditunions are considered to be instrumentalities of
the United States, exempt from Federal income tax under the provisions of the
Federal Credit Union Act, 12 U.S.C. S1768, thus qualifying for exemption under
IRC 501(c)(1). The credit union area has been the subject of recent activity despite
the small amount of published precedent in this area. This discussion is designed to
provide the reader with background material in this area.
1. Legislative History
Specific statutory language granting exemption for creditunions first
appeared in the Code in 1951. Prior to that time creditunions generally qualified
for tax exempt status under revenue statutes exempting building and loan
associations and cooperative banks. However, in 1951, Congress deleted from the
Code the language according tax exempt status to mutual savings banks and
federal and state savings and loan associations. While the legislative history of the
Revenue Act of 1951 contains an extensive discussion concerning the reasons for
the elimination of exempt status for mutual savings banks and domestic savings
and loan associations, it is silent with respect to the purpose for the continuation of
exempt status for credit unions.
However, the probable reason for the continued favorable tax treatment of
credit unions is contained in the reasons underlying the removal of exempt status
for mutual savings banks and savings and loan associations. In reference to mutual
savings banks the legislative history of the Revenue Act of 1951 states:
"Mutual savings banks were established to encourage thrift and
to provide safe and convenient facilities to care for savings. They also
have the responsibility of investing the funds left with them so as to
be able to give their depositors a return on their savings. Mutual
savings banks were originally organized for the principal purpose of
serving factory workers and other wage earners of moderate means
who, at the time these banks were started, had no other place where
they could deposit their savings.
1979 EO CPE Text
"At the present time, mutual savings banks are in active
competition with commercial banks and life insurance companies for
the public savings, and they compete with many types of taxable
institutions in the security and real estate markets. As a result your
committee believes that the continuance of the tax-free treatment now
accorded mutual savings banks would be discriminatory. So long as
they are exempt from income tax, mutual savings banks enjoy the
advantage of being able to finance their growth out of earnings
without incurring the tax liabilities paid by ordinary corporations
when they undertake to expand through the use of their own reserves.
The tax treatment provided by your committee would place mutual
savings banks on a parity with their competitors." (Senate Report No.
781, 1951-2 C.B. 476.)
The reasons for removing tax exempt status for mutual savings banks were
also applied to savings and loan associations:
"The grounds on which your committee's bill taxes savings and
loan associations on their retained earnings, after making a reasonable
allowance for additions to a reserve for bad debts, are the same as
those on which mutual savings banks are taxed under the bill.
Moreover, since savings and loan associations are no longer self-
contained cooperative institutions as they were when originally
organized there is relatively little difference between their operations
and those of other financial institutions which accept deposits and
make real-estate loans." (Senate Report No. 781, 1951-2 C.B. 478.)
Thus, the reasons for removal of tax exempt status for mutual savings banks
and savings and loan associations was their fundamental departure from the
principles and purposes of their formation. The difference between these
organizations and other financial institutions subject to Federal income tax was, in
the view of Congress, minimal. It follows that the purpose for the retention of the
tax exempt status of creditunions in 1951 probably was the absence of any
indications that creditunions had deviated from their original purpose and
characteristics. Had creditunions resembled taxable financial institutions at that
time, it seems probable that Congress might not have continued their exempt status
while at the same time removing exempt status from mutual savings banks and
savings and loans.
2. Characteristics of CreditUnions
Credit unions historically have had certain features and legal requirements
which generally distinguish them from other financial institutions. The first and
most significant of these is the requirement of a meaningful, written, and enforced
common bond for its members. The types of common bonds for credit union
membership have generally been described as follows:
(1) employees of a particular business or institution;
(2) members associated in a particular organization; or
(3) residents of a well-defined neighborhood or community.
Secondly, a major reason for the establishment of creditunions in this country was
to provide their members with a source of personal loans, in small amounts and for
a short term, which generally were difficult to obtain from other financial
institutions, absent the payment of usurious interest rates.
A feature of creditunions historically distinguishing them from various
other financial institutions is the limitation on membership to qualifying
individuals. Thus, creditunions normally do not admit corporations to their
membership. Another characteristic normally distinguishing creditunions from
other financial institutions is the fact that creditunions rarely advertise, and when
they do, it is generally limited to publications designed to reach only their
membership.
3. Recent Developments The St. Mary's Bank Case
In the case of La Caisse Populaire Ste-Marie (St. Mary's Bank) v. United
States, 425 F. Supp. 512 (D.N.H. 1977), the Service maintained that the
organization in question was not entitled to exemption as a state-chartered credit
union under IRC 501(c)(14)(A) because it had the following characteristics:
(1) it had no written or enforced common bond requirement for
its membership;
(2) it did not limit its lending to small unsecured loans, but
engaged primarily in real estate mortgage lending (80 percent
of its lending portfolio was devoted to commercial and
individual real estate mortgage loans);
(3) it made various large loans to numerous corporations and
businesses (real estate loans to one business exceeded
$350,000);
(4) it was not charteredunder the general credit union statute of
the state in which it was located;
(5) it operated in direct competition with commercial banks,
cooperative banks and savings and loans, and advertised that it
was a full service bank via the general media in an effort to
obtain new customers;
(6) it offered demand deposit (checking) accounts and other
services and facilities characteristic of commercial banks; and
(7) it had a significant number of corporations and businesses
as members.
The District Court determined that the organization in question was entitled
to exemption as a state-chartered credit union under IRC 501(c)(14)(A), and the
case was appealed to the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit which affirmed the
District Court decision. On appeal, four issues were discussed:
(1) whether creditunions could permissibly offer such services
as demand deposits (checking accounts) and real estate loans;
(2) whether the organization was adequately servicing the needs
of its members for short-term unsecured loans;
(3) whether there was a requirement of a common bond between
members of a credit union; and
(4) whether calling the organization a credit union was a "gross
misuse of the name" (a principle enunciated in U.S. v.
Cambridge Loan and Building Co., 278 U.S. 55 (1928)) or
whether the State of New Hampshire could reasonably classify
the organization as a credit union.
The Court of Appeals concluded that:
(1) a credit union could offer such services;
(2) no evidence was presented that the organization was not
meeting the needs of its members for short-term unsecured
loans;
(3) the finding of the District Court that a de facto common
bond (French ancestry) existed between members was not
clearly erroneous; and
(4) IRC 501(c)(14)(A) necessarily implies that state law
controls the definition of the term credit union. The Court
defined the term credit union as a democratically controlled,
cooperative, nonprofit society organized for the purpose of
encouraging thrift and self-reliance among its members by
creating a source of credit at a fair and reasonable rate of
interest in order to improve the economic and social conditions
of its members.
4. Requirements for Exemption in Light of St. Mary's Bank
No further appeal by the Government in St. Mary's was made as the decision
did not conflict with any decision of another appellate court or the Court of Claims
and thus there was no basis for seeking a writ of certiorari. The Court of Appeals'
decision held that the district court's finding of a "de facto" common bond was "not
clearly erroneous" and was upheld. The case stands for no more than that the
Service's factual determination was incorrect. The Court of Appeals impliedly
reaffirmed the principle of a requirement for a common bond as well as the
requirement that creditunions must provide their members with a source of short-
term unsecured loans.
5. Expansion of Powers of Federal CreditUnions
It should be noted that the powers of federal creditunions have recently been
expanded. Federal creditunions are now authorized to issue "share draft accounts"
which are similar to checking accounts, and P.L. 95-22 allows them to engage in
limited real estate first mortgage loans. In addition, P.L. 92-221 authorized federal
insurance for demand deposit checking accounts of state-chartered credit unions,
indicating that Congress does not view the issuance of checking accounts by state-
chartered creditunions as inconsistent with the credit union concept.
6. Legislative Proposal of the Administration
In addition, it should also be pointed out that H.R. 12078, "The Revenue Act
of 1978" as proposed by the Treasury Department to carry out President Carter's
1978 tax recommendations, contained a provision to eliminate federal and state-
chartered creditunions from the list of organizations that are exempt under section
501(c) of the Code. The provision in question was stricken from the bill which
eventually became P.L. 95-600, the Revenue Act of 1978, (1978-3 (Vol. 1)), and
we are unsure of its prospects for the future.
. M. STATE CHARTERED CREDIT UNIONS UNDER 501(c)(14)(A)
Introduction
State chartered credit unions without capital stock, organized and operated
for mutual. exempt from Federal income tax under
IRC 501(c)(14)(A). Federal credit unions are considered to be instrumentalities of
the United States, exempt from